header-logo header-logo

15 May 2015
Issue: 7652 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights

Breyer Group plc and others v Department of Energy and Climate Change [2015] EWCA Civ 408, [2015] All ER (D) 03 (May)

The Feed-In-Tariffs (FIT) scheme introduced by the defendant Department of Energy and Climate Change encouraged low-carbon generation of electricity by specified types of technology, including solar photovoltaic. The claimants complained that they had suffered substantial losses as a result of a proposed amendment to the FIT scheme, which was subsequently found by the courts to be unlawful. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal by the defendant and a cross-appeal by the claimants against the determination by a judge in the High Court of a number of preliminary issues.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
back-to-top-scroll